[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Suggestion for merging the libcurses and libslang code
From: |
T.E.Dickey |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Suggestion for merging the libcurses and libslang code |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Nov 1999 20:02:38 -0500 (EST) |
>
> On Mon, 8 Nov 1999 address@hidden wrote:
>
> > Now that there is a concerted effort to make pdcurses work for lynx, it
> > might be appropriate look into eliminating explicit calls on libslang
> > entirely from the lynx code.
> >
> > I say this because libslang has an slcurses interface, in which a subset
> > of curses functions are simulated by slang calls within the library. The
> > Linux version of libslang is automatically an slcurses library, and there
> > is an include file, slcurses.h, that sets up the correspondences.
>
> My version of history goes like this:
> Lynx had the (questionable) luck to be one of the first programs that
> used slang as an alternative for (n)curses. At the point in time when
he did modify a copy of the sc spreadsheet program, somewhat earlier iirc.
> if lynx had been slang-ified later, when just including slcurses.h would
> have provided most or all of the needed curses functions and macros
> under their curses names.
perhaps - but John Davis has stated that he prefers to not use the slcurses.h
header, but code directly with slang's functions.
> > When Davis was posting to this news group, he pointed out that slcurses
> > may not have the complete curses functionality wanted in lynx. But, I find
> > it difficult to believe that libpdcurses, which compiles to 50 KB on my
> > machine, could really have that much more functionality than libslang that
> > compiles to 400 KB.
>
> If "When Davis was posting to this news group" refers to the time of first
> slangification, around Lynx 2-5, then slcurses has changed a lot since
> then.
he hasn't been around for a while, but definitely was still posting after 2.8.1
> Klaus
--
Thomas E. Dickey
address@hidden
http://www.clark.net/pub/dickey